Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

For Advent: The Synoptic Problem
CathTruth.com ^ | 2007 | CathTruth.com

Posted on 12/09/2014 5:01:54 PM PST by Salvation

The Synoptic Problem

The order of the Gospels in our printed Bible is that sanctioned by Tradition. The first three Gospels are frequently called the Synoptics (from the Greek terms syn "together," and opsis "view"). When placed side by side and brought under one view, these three Gospels present a striking resemblance and appear as one narrative. Not only are many of the same events and speeches recorded in each, but the order and manner in which they are narrated is nearly the same. The problem as to the origin and relation of the first three Gospels, presented by these resemblances, has been called the "Synoptic Problem." We can here only touch on some of the many theories proposed to solve this problem.

1) Some scholars find the solution in the oral tradition of the Church (Oral-Tradition theory): The early Apostolic teaching took a fixed form; the life and teaching of our Lord came eventually to be told in practically the same stereotyped way; the Synoptists - independently of each other - simply wrote down this stereotyped oral Gospel.

This theory is universally recognized to be insufficient. The Synoptics do not quite agree on some very important matters on which we would expect tradition to be unanimous - as the words of the institution of the Eucharist, the Lord's Prayer, the narrative of Peter's confession. Again, the language of the primitive catechesis was Aramaic; the Gospels in the form in which we possess them are in Greek; yet the Synoptics often agree word for word.

2) Others maintain that the three Synoptics were derived - with more or less modification - from one written source. This theory, however, fails to explain the omissions by St. Mark and the differences in arrangement in the Synoptics. Again, why are all contemporaries and the Gospels themselves silent about this source?

3) According to the Two-Document theory, the oldest and original document was a collection of the sayings of the Lord, which contained the Sermon on the Mount, the temptation of our Lord, and a number of other incidents. This collection of sayings is no longer extant as a distinct document. Next, St. Mark wrote his Gospel which was an original and independent composition. Then our present St. Matthew's Gospel (in Greek) and St. Luke's Gospel were compiled; the Evangelist in each case took Mark's Gospel as his model and chief source, and to this framework he added the sayings of our Lord and finally the materials peculiar to his Gospel.

The Two-Document theory cannot be reconciled with the constant tradition of the Church - a tradition which can be traced to the beginning of the second century - that St. Matthew's Gospel preceded the others and was originally written in Aramaic. Catholic scholars, however, may subscribe to the following arrangement: Matthew wrote the first Gospel in Aramaic; Mark used this Gospel when composing his own Gospel in Greek; then the Greek translation of Matthew was made in partial dependence on Mark but in substantial conformity with the Aramaic original; Luke wrote in partial dependence on Matthew and Mark but had other sources at his disposal.

4) The best solution seems to be the following: Mark and Luke used the writings of their predecessors: in addition, each Evangelist used sources and oral traditions peculiar to himself. The differences can be explained partly by the variations in the oral Gospel, partly by the style, special purpose and personality of each of the Evangelists.

St. Matthew

St. Matthew's Gospel was intended for the Jewish converts of Palestine, and was written in Aramaic, the language of the country. Unlike St. Luke (3:38) who in his genealogy of Christ goes back to God, St. Matthew goes no further back than Abraham (1:1-2). From the outset St. Matthew shows us in Jesus the son par excellence of Abraham and David - the Messias in Whom were fulfilled the prophetic oracles. Writing primarily for members of the chosen race, the Evangelist does not explain such Jewish terms as "raca" ("fool") (5:22), "carbona" (27:6), etc. St. Matthew does not explain as St. Luke does - Palestinian geographical terms, but simply speaks of Christ's "own city" and "own country" (9:1; 13:54). He repeatedly dwells on our Lord's denunciations of the Pharisees and of the Jewish leaders (ch. 12, 16, 22, 23).

The aim of the first Gospel is to show that Jesus of Nazareth is the Messias - the Christ or the "Anointed One" - promised in the Old Testament, and that His kingdom is the Church which He founded. St. Matthew constantly refers to prophecies fulfilled in our Lord in words such as these: "As it is written."

"This was done that it might be fulfilled what the Lord spoke." St. Matthew reproduces some sixty or seventy passages from the Old Testament; the other Evangelists together quote the Old Testament about fifty times. Again, St. Mark and St. Luke as a rule adduce only those quotations which occur in our Lord's discourses; St. Matthew, on the other hand, argues from the pages of the sacred text. While proving that Jesus is the fulfillment of the ancient prophecies, St. Matthew at the same time explains how the Jews - always resisting the inspirations of divine grace - rejected Him Who came upon earth primarily to save the Jews.

Although St. Matthew wrote chiefly for Jewish converts, his Gospel is not restricted to them. The adoration of the Magi - who represent the first fruits of the conversion of the Gentiles to Christ - should more naturally find a place in the third Gospel, the Gospel of universal salvation; yet the account of it is found in the first Gospel. Again, St. Matthew narrates parables in which special preference is given to the Gentiles - as, for example, the parables of the two sons, of the wicked husbandmen, and of the marriage of the king's son. He quotes prophecies concerning the Gentiles (8:11; 12:18, 21; 21:42 to 22:14; 25:32) and narrates miracles worked by our Lord for them (8:5-13; 15:21-28). He declares the universality of the Messias' kingdom in narrating Christ's commission to His Apostles to go and teach all nations (28-19). On the other hand, the first Gospel leaves to the third the narration of such specifically Jewish incidents as the mission of the Precursor, the Circumcision, the ransoming of Jesus, and Mary's purification.

While the opening chapters of St. Luke's Gospel are composed from the viewpoint of the Mother of Jesus, those of St. Matthew's are composed from the viewpoint of St. Joseph. In St. Luke's Gospel all events seem to converge toward Mary, in St. Matthew's Gospel all events gravitate around St. Joseph.

It is to Joseph that the angel announces the approaching birth of a Saviour from a virgin mother. He it is who is head of the Holy Family. He receives the order to take the Divine Infant as quickly as possible to Egypt in order to withdraw Him from the plots of Herod. It is to him again that the order is given - when the danger is past - to bring Jesus back to Palestine. On the basis of this double circumstance, may we not legitimately argue that, directly or indirectly, it is above all to St. Joseph and Mary, who took so great a part in the mysteries of the Infancy and Hidden Life, and to the members of their family, that St. Matthew and St. Luke owe their remarkable acquaintance with these phases of Christ's life?

St. Mark

St. Mark was the son of Mary whose house at Jerusalem was a meeting place of the Christians. It was to Mary's house that St. Peter went after his miraculous deliverance from prison. Some conjecture that the youth who fled naked from Gethsemani (14:51) was the Evangelist himself. St. Mark was baptized and instructed by St. Peter. In about the year 42 A.D. he came to Rome with the Prince of the Apostles. There at the request of the faithful he wrote his Gospel about the year 50 A.D. His Gospel is a record of the substance of St. Peter's preaching concerning our Lord. St. Peter's discourse in the house of the Roman centurion Cornelius (Acts 10:34-43) has been justly considered as an outline of St Mark's Gospel - as St. Mark's Gospel in miniature.

The Gospel of St. Mark gives special attention to St. Peter. The vivid descriptions, the swift movement of thought, the frequent use of such words as "straightway," "immediately," "quickly," "forthwith," "at once," strongly recall the quick and impulsive fisherman of Galilee. The Gospel suppresses incidents indicative of his position and dignity among the Apostles, such as, for example, the walking upon the water (Matt. 14:29), the finding of the coin in the fish's mouth (Matt. 17:26), the promise of the Primacy (Matt. 16:16-19), and the commission to confirm the brethren (Luke 22:31-32). On the other hand, events which are derogatory to St. Peter are deliberately emphasized - even when they are minimized or passed over by the other Evangelists. Nowhere, for example, is the depth of St. Peter's fall more fully indicated than in Mark's Gospel. One can well imagine St Peter supervising "over St. Mark's shoulder" the composition of the Gospel so that the Apostle's defects rather than his merits are emphasized.

Internal evidence shows that the Gospel was written for Gentiles, especially for Roman Gentile converts. The Gospel quotes but seldom from the Old Testament (cf. 1:2, 3; 15:28), since an appeal to the prophets would have been meaningless to the Romans. So, too, the title "Son of David" is rarely applied to our Lord. Comparisons between the Old and the New Law - which form so striking a feature in the Sermon on the Mount are also missing. On the other hand, St. Mark is careful to explain Jewish rites and customs which might prove unintelligible to a pagan reader, as, for example, the purifications (7:3), the passover (14:12), the day of preparation (15:42). He explains words and expressions which Gentile converts would not be likely to understand; for example: "Boanerges" (3:17), "Talitha cumi" (5:41), "Ephpheta" (7:34), "Corban" (7:11), "Bartimaeus" (10:46), "Two mites" (12:42). He uses Latin terms which no other Evangelist employs; for example, "spiculator," executioner (6:27), "sextarius," a cup (7:8), "quadrans" a farthing (12:42), "centurio," a Roman officer in charge of 100 soldiers (15:39).

The aim of St. Mark's Gospel is to show, especially from our Lord's miracles, that Christ is true God, that He alone verifies in Himself the Roman title of "Lord of All." The very first verse of the Gospel contains the triumphant assertion of Christ's Divinity: "The beginning of the Gospel of Jesus Christ, the Son of God." The Evangelist not only affirms the fact of our Lord's Divinity but also indicates its consequences. He shows that all things in heaven and upon earth must needs be subject to Christ. It is for this reason that Mark insists so much on miracles and dwells upon them with a fullness of detail not found in St. Matthew's and St. Luke's Gospels. Writing for the pagans who peopled nature with divinities and admitted the existence of "many gods," St Mark describes especially Christ's miracles over nature and shows that even evil spirits must be subject to Him. In St. Mark's account, Christ never uses explicitly the title "Son of God" but always refers to Himself as "Son of Man." Our Lord's humble ways thus stand in sharp contrast with those of the Roman Emperors who boldly and proudly styled themselves the gods, lords and saviours of the world.

St. Mark excels in portraying the emotions and affections of both Christ and His hearers. He gives minute details of our Lord's gestures, looks and words. He calls attention to Christ's anger, indignation, love, pity, grief and wonder. At the same time the Evangelist records the deep impression which Christ's words and miracles had on His followers. He tells us that the disciples and the multitudes were in astonishment at His doctrine and works.

St. Luke

St. Luke was a native of Antioch - a city renowned for its learning - where he received his early education. From the fluency and perfection of his literary style, it is inferred that he was a Greek. The teaching of Tradition that St. Luke was a physician is based on certain statements in his own writings. The Evangelist manifests great interest in diseases and their cure, and describes them in the language of ancient medicine. St. Paul explicitly refers to him as "the most dear physician" (Colossians 4:14). The belief that St. Luke was a painter is based on the statement of Nicephoras Callistos of the sixteenth century that the Empress Eudocia "sent to Pulcheria from Jerusalem an image of the Mother of God, which the Apostle Luke had painted." After his conversion he became a special friend of St. Paul, whom he first met at Troas. He remained St. Paul's companion on the missionary journeys. He visited St. Paul frequently during the latter's imprisonment at Caesarea, remained at the Apostle's side during the two years' imprisonment in Rome, and was alone with St. Paul at the time of his last imprisonment (II Timothy 4:11). Little is known of St. Luke after St. Paul's death.

1) St. Luke's Gospel is a record of Christ's life and teaching as preached by St. Paul. It stresses those facts which illustrate - in the spirit of the Apostle of the Gentiles - the universality of salvation for both Jew and Greek. It sets Christ forth as the Saviour of mankind. In exquisitely tender colors it depicts our Lord as the merciful and pitying Divine Physician - as the Friend of sinners and Consoler of afflicted. It describes those incidents which would touch the hearts of the heathen and awaken their confidence in God. The love of Christ for sinners is illustrated in the accounts of Zachaeus (19:2), the sinful woman (7:37), and the penitent thief (23:42-43). It is St. Luke's Gospel alone that narrates the beautiful parables of the Good Samaritan (10:25), the Prodigal Son (15:11), the Unjust Steward (16:1), Dives and Lazarus (16:19), the Pharisee and the Publican (18:10). The doctrine of universal salvation appears even in the genealogy of Christ, which is brought down from Adam, the father of all mankind (3:23-38), and not - as in St Matthew's Gospel - from Abraham, the father of the chosen people. The Evangelist omits whatever might be offensive to the Gentiles or cause the Jews to glory over them. The mockery and execution of Christ by the Roman soldiers is passed over in silence.

Besides being called the "Gospel of Mercy", St. Luke's Gospel is frequently designated by various other titles. Occasionally it is referred to as the "Gospel of antithetical pictures." St. Luke has left us such contrasts as the following: Simon and the Sinful Woman; Martha and Mary; the Pharisee and the Publican; the Good Samaritan and the Priest and the Levite; Dives and Lazarus; the Good Thief and the Bad. St. Luke's Gospel has also been called the "Gospel of Hymns" because it contains the <I>Magnificat</I>, the Benedictus and the Nunc Dimittis. It is also said to be the "Gospel of Prayers," not only because it contains the Our Father and the Hail Mary but because it alone records that our Lord prayed on several distinct occasions - at His baptism, after cleansing the leper, before calling the Twelve, at His Transfiguration, on the cross for His executioners, and at the moment of His death (3:21; 5:16, 6:12, etc.).

St. Luke's Gospel has in a special manner been designated as the "Gospel of women." It places before us and describes the following feminine characters: Elizabeth, the Mother of John the Baptist; Anna, the aged prophetess; the "sinful woman" who anointed the Lord's feet in the house of the Pharisee (7:36-50); the women "who ministered unto Jesus of their substance," among whom was Mary Magdalen (8:2); Martha, the sister of Lazarus, and Mary, Martha's sister (10:38-42); "the woman in the crowd" who lifted up her voice and said to Jesus: "Blessed is the womb that bore Thee" (11:27); the widow of Naim (7:11-17); the woman whom our Lord delivered from her infirmity (13:10-17); the women of Jerusalem who met Jesus on the way to Calvary (23:27-31). Preeminent among all these is Mary, the Mother of God, who occupies a prominent place especially in the first two chapters of the Gospel.

2) The Acts of the Apostles - also written by St. Luke - are a continuation of the third Gospel, and like it are addressed to a certain Theophilus. The plan and scope of the Acts are contained in the words of our Lord uttered shortly before the Ascension: "You shall receive the power of the Holy Ghost coming upon you and you shall be witnesses unto Me in Jerusalem, and in all Judea, and Samaria, and even to the uttermost part of the earth" (1:8). Christ here assigns a twofold field of labor to His Apostles - Palestine, on the one hand, and the Gentile world, on the other. Accordingly, St. Luke narrates in a concrete manner the foundation and propagation of the Church among the Jews through the instrumentality of St. Peter (1 to 12), and then among the Gentiles through the instrumentality of St. Paul (13 to 28). In describing the faithful execution of the Master's command, St. Luke at the same time shows that Christ is the Redeemer of all men - of both Jews and Gentiles - and that the Gospel is the power of salvation unto all who believe (Romans 1:16). St. Luke is also careful to indicate how the Holy Ghost presided over every step and stage of the work, and hence the Acts have been called the "Gospel of the Holy Ghost"; for it is He Who acts, speaks, enjoins, prohibits in a word, Who is the principle animating and impelling the chief personages.

Discussion Aids
Set I

1. What is the origin and meaning of the "Gospel"?
2. In what sense is there only one Gospel in the New Testament? How do you account for the
differences between the four Gospels?
3. Do the four Gospels tell us everything about Christ?
4. What are the symbols for the four Evangelists?
5. In what language were the Gospels written?

Set II
1. What is meant by the word "synoptic"?
2. Why are the first three Gospels called "Synoptic" Gospels?
3. What is the "Synoptic Problem?"
4. What solutions have been proposed to this problem?
5. What seems to be the satisfactory answer?

Set III
1. For whom was St. Matthew's Gospel written? Explain?
2. Why was St. Matthew's Gospel written? Give proofs in support of your answer.
3. Does St. Matthew's Gospel omit specifically Jewish incidents? Give examples.
4. What great saint is featured by the opening chapters of St. Matthew's Gospel? What conclusions do you draw from this?
5. Who was St. Mark?
6. What was his Gospel?
7. What saint does the Gospel feature in a special way?
8. For whom was St. Mark's Gospel written?
9. What was the aim of St Mark's Gospel?
10. What characteristics of Christ and of Christ's followers does St. Mark portray?
11. Who was St. Luke?
12. St. Luke's Gospel is said to be the "Gospel of Mercy." Explain.
13. What four other titles have been given to St. Lukes' Gospel? Why?
14. What great saint occupies a prominent place in the opening chapters of St. Luke's Gospel?
15. Mention some Catholic book which carries an explanation of the Sunday Epistles and Gospels. Give a summary of the explanation of next Sunday's Gospel.

Religious Practices

1. I will listen with reverent attention to the reading of the Gospel on Sunday.
2. In imitation of St. Matthew I will try to bring the Jews of our day to recognize Christ as the Promised Messias.
3. With St. Mark I will make frequent acts of faith in the Divinity of Christ: "God of God, light of light, true God of true God; begotten, not made; being of one substance with the Father; by whom all things were made" (Nicene Creed).
4. With St. Luke I will have confidence in the infinite mercy and compassion of the God-Man.



TOPICS: Apologetics; Catholic; History; Theology
KEYWORDS: catholic; gospels; synoptics
Is there really a problem?

Your comments......

1 posted on 12/09/2014 5:01:54 PM PST by Salvation
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: All
For Advent: The Synoptic Problem
For Advent: Investigate the Abortion Industry
For Advent: The Virgin Birth
For Advent: Two Canons: Scripture & Tradition
For Advent: SAINT JOSEPH AND LIVING OUT ADVENT
For Advent: How to Advent
For Advent -- 24 Quotes About Purity That Every Young (& Old) Catholic Should Know
For Advent: Five Ways To Stop Worrying TODAY!
For Advent: Answering the New Atheism, Dawkins Dismantled
For Advent: The Sunday Propers: Advent and Penance
2 posted on 12/09/2014 5:04:06 PM PST by Salvation ("With God all things are possible." Matthew 19:26)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: nickcarraway; NYer; ELS; Pyro7480; livius; ArrogantBustard; Catholicguy; RobbyS; marshmallow; ...

Catholic Gospel Ping!


3 posted on 12/09/2014 5:05:06 PM PST by Salvation ("With God all things are possible." Matthew 19:26)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Salvation

A solution in search of a problem?


4 posted on 12/09/2014 5:06:29 PM PST by bad company
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: bad company

Or,

Matthew wrote his gospel in Hebrew (some word plays and puns work in Hebrew, but not Aramaic).

Mark’s work was in Hebrew also (see Carmignac, Birth of the Synoptics) but translated into Latin while he was with Peter in Rome; and then finished after Peter’s death with a Greek version (perhaps in Alexandria)

Luke — ditto, using Hebrew sources, except for the introductory words (and using Mary as a source for the early portions)

John — ditto (See, The Hebrew Christ, by Tresmontant)
-and written very early


5 posted on 12/09/2014 5:24:01 PM PST by CondorFlight (I)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: CondorFlight

John was written much later. This is not discussing him. Just the synoptic authors, Matthew, Mark, Luke.


6 posted on 12/09/2014 5:25:55 PM PST by Salvation ("With God all things are possible." Matthew 19:26)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: Salvation

I have never see it as a problem. Just different styles and emphasis.


7 posted on 12/09/2014 5:31:51 PM PST by defconw (If not now, WHEN?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: CondorFlight

Mark written in the 70s

Matthew written ater the 70s because it tells of the destruction of Jerusalem

Luke was written in the 80s or 90s


8 posted on 12/09/2014 5:47:51 PM PST by Salvation ("With God all things are possible." Matthew 19:26)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: CondorFlight

Mark written in the 70s

Matthew written after the 70s because it tells of the destruction of Jerusalem

Luke was written in the 80s or 90s


9 posted on 12/09/2014 5:48:25 PM PST by Salvation ("With God all things are possible." Matthew 19:26)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: Salvation

“John was written much later.”

Except that the internal evidence is that it was written very early (see the Tresmontant book); although perhaps revised later at the end of John’s life and released in Greek.

Thiede claims that a fragment of Mark dated to 50 AD was found at Qumran (there is a lively debate over that).

But all the Christians at the start were united, in Jerusalem; their story was therefore single; what they believed was shared among them; and it was very possible for them to take that unified single message out to the world—even basing it on common written records which were theirs.


10 posted on 12/09/2014 5:51:55 PM PST by CondorFlight (I)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: CondorFlight

John was written in the year 100 or thereafter. His writing is theology. Every word is important.

Not a synoptic Gospel, either, FYI.


11 posted on 12/09/2014 5:55:12 PM PST by Salvation ("With God all things are possible." Matthew 19:26)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: Salvation

“John was written in the year 100 or thereafter.”

And yet his intended audience appears to be Jewish.
He speaks extensively of such concepts as “the children of the wedding tent”, Elijah, Jonah, etc, without attempting to explain to a gentile audience who or what such a tent was, or who Elijah and Jonah were(Would a Roman peasant know this?)

He speaks of the “Sheep” in Jerusalem, meaning, the “sheep gate”, as if the reader would know that already. But if he wrote around 100 AD, that gate would have been destroyed already for 30 years anyway, along with the generation which knew that nickname.

He speaks of the pool of Bethesda, with its columns (same problem as above; if he wrote in 100 AD, it was long gone).

The primary source of danger to believers in his gospel comes from the Judean hierarchy—again, a problem long gone and since replaced by Roman persecution, if he was writing in 100 AD.

“Blood” is sometimes written in the plural, “bloods”, as one would do in Hebrew, but not Greek. And there are several other examples.

That and a great deal more suggests a much earlier period for the writing of at least a first version of John.


12 posted on 12/09/2014 6:13:36 PM PST by CondorFlight (I)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: Salvation

A certain amount of curiosity attends to how these accounts were constructed. We must reply upon additional testimony from the early Fathers for any clues. The picture best derived from that is fairly well expressed in “4.” above, so, as some have noted, it is more like a solution in search of a problem. It certainly should come as no surprise that in some points the synoptic Gospels agree to the letter in many points, because they are ultimately written by the Holy Spirit.

St. Basil: “Every word of the Gospels is deemed more eminent than all the other precepts of the Holy Spirit because in other writings the Lord addressed us through the prophets as His servants, while in the Gospels He does this through Himself.” There is a reason an Alleluia Verse precedes the reading of these Gospels in those contexts where the body and blood of Christ are to be distributed to poor sinners for their comfort and strength, as well as a reason we stand up (to the extent we are able), to hear these words.

The Gospels, synoptic as well as John’s, are not merely information or stories to be heard with curiosity, but are the Word of the Lord who is risen from the dead, through which He has ordained to lift us out of death and misery both truly and really.


13 posted on 12/09/2014 6:58:04 PM PST by Fester Chugabrew (Even the compassion of the wicked is cruel.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Salvation
ALL GOOD STUFF!

Thank you for posting it.

14 posted on 12/09/2014 7:08:08 PM PST by cloudmountain
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Salvation

This is a beautiful thread, an intelligent discussion of the Gospels without acrimony.


15 posted on 12/09/2014 9:10:58 PM PST by Jeff Chandler (Doctrine doesn't change. The trick is to find a way around it.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Salvation

Is there really a problem?


I have no problem with some ones view of the differences or similarities in the Gospels, finding the time line in which they were written may be a big help.

None of the gospels tell about the destruction of Jerusalem but only that it would happen which does not prove anything as it could easily be argued that the Gospels were about Jesus and not about Jerusalem which could make sense.

But the destruction of Jerusalem? wouldn’t they be compelled to show evidence that the things Jesus said would happen did actually happen if it was all written after the fact?

It is widely agreed that the gospel of Luke was written after Mathew and Mark and this shows in Luke 1:1 to 3.

And acts 1:1 that it is the same writer to the same person.

Luke 1 1:1 to 3
1 Forasmuch as many have taken in hand to set forth in order a declaration of those things which are most surely believed among us,

2 Even as they delivered them unto us, which from the beginning were eyewitnesses, and ministers of the word;

3 It seemed good to me also, having had perfect understanding of all things from the very first, to write unto thee in order, most excellent Theophilus,

Acts 1:1 The former treatise have I made, O Theophilus, of all that Jesus began both to do and teach,

Luke verses 1 and 2 shows that this was not the first gospel written and acts one show that the writer of Luke is referring to the gospel he had written.

It also shows that acts was written after at least three gospels, and that the writer who wrote Luke was familiar with every thing which happened from the very first.

So I personally believe that all of the Gospels except for John were written before the destruction of Jerusalem and possibly even John.

If the destruction had of happened before acts was written I believe it would surly been talked about.

St Peter is the Hero in acts up until Chapter 12 then never heard from again until later in life through his epistles, and the same with John.

It seems that the writer of acts took up with Paul for some reason we don`t know, so he could have no way of knowing what was happening on the part of the other apostles but he would have known about the destruction of Jerusalem.

We have traditions which make the apostles great men but have no details, did many of them die before the fall of Jerusalem? what happened to them?

It is of great interest to me to know what happened to the men who walked, talked, lived with our Lord and was taught by him for over three years.


16 posted on 12/10/2014 12:32:22 PM PST by ravenwolf (` Does the scripture explain it in full detail? if not how can you?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: CondorFlight

Please provide a link to the facsimiles of the extant Hebrew MSS for your conjecture.


17 posted on 12/10/2014 3:57:42 PM PST by dartuser
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: Salvation

Beautiful history! Thanks.


18 posted on 12/10/2014 6:08:03 PM PST by Mariamante
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson